Overview of National Monitoring Network (NMN) Project

Update for NWQMC

April 12, 2005

History—How we got to this point

• Charge from CEQ and NSTC (SWAQ) to ACWI

• Council deliberates in San Jose (December, 2004) and recommends that ACWI accept charge

• ACWI members polled and charge accepted

Specific NMN tasks from CWQ charge

• Define elements of the network and corresponding management questions

• Describe how recommended network addresses important issues and management questions through case studies

• Determine which questions and network components are not being adequately addressed at present

Specific NMN tasks from CWQ charge (continued)

• Recommend specific actions to better coordinate existing networks

• Recommend specific actions to enhance compatibility of NMN with Ocean and Earth Observation Systems

• Case studies: Mississippi, PNW, Gulf of Maine, Chesapeake

Overview of Council Plan to conduct NMN Project

• Developed during Council meeting in San Jose, December 2004

• Develop Design of NMN based on what is needed to address issues and questions– Where to monitor– What to monitor for– Frequency of monitoring– Metadata needed

Overview of Plan (continued)

• Conduct inventory of existing monitoring– National and regional efforts– State and local in case study areas

• Compare design with actual on-going monitoring

• Identify gaps and causes of gaps

• Recommend actions to fill gaps

Timeline

• April 12-14, 2005: Report progress to Council

• April 18-May 6, 2005: Improve content, preliminary information about plan for design and procedure for inventory

• May 12, 2005: Report progress to SWAQ

• July 18, 2005: Workgroups complete first draft of reports to Steering Committee

Timeline (continued)

• July 26-28: Council meeting; report content is nearing completion

• September 2005: Interim report to ACWI, CEQ, SWAQ

• January 2006: Final report to CEQ and SWAQ

NMN Steering Committee

• Task is to oversee entire process and keep track of big picture

• Members:– Brass, Caffrey, Cox, Currier, Dycus, Hameedi,

Johnson, Leslie, Mallard, Spooner, Tennant, Vowinkel

• Weekly conference calls

Objectives of NMN

1. Define status and trends of key water quality parameters and conditions on a nationwide basis

2. Provide data relevant to determining whether goals, standards, and resource management objectives are being met, thus promoting sustainable and beneficial use of coastal and inland water resources

Objectives (continued)

3. Provide data to identify and rank existing and emerging problems to help target more intensive monitoring, preventive actions, or remediation

4. Provide data to support and define coastal oceanographic and hydrologic research, including influences of freshwater inflows

Objectives (continued)

5. Provide quality-assured data for use in preparation of interpretive reports and educational materials

Workgroups

• Design– 25+ participants; Chaired by Korndoerfer

• Inventory– 15+ participants, Chaired by Spooner

• Methods and Data Comparability– ? Participants, Chaired by Brass and Vowinkel

• Data Management—to be formed

Products expected fromDesign Workgroup

• An initial list of specific places to be monitored (dots on the map)

• A list of constituents to be measured at all locations

• A second list of constituents that are to be monitored at selected sites

• The recommended frequency of sample collection

Design Workgroup Products(Continued)

• A list of ancillary data that must be associated with a monitoring network

• An explanation and justification for the choices about:– Where to monitor– What to monitor– Frequency of sample collection

Products expected fromInventory Workgroup

• Criteria used for including networks in the inventory

• For each network included in the inventory, a concise statement of the monitoring objectives of that network

• A GIS coverage and list of specific places that are monitored by Federal, tribal, and state agencies and other interests

Inventory Workgroup Products(continued)

• A GIS coverage and list of specific locations that will be monitored as part of IOOS, to the extent that this information is available

• Link the locations identified in tasks 2 and 3 above with the constituents measured at these locations and the frequency of measurement

Inventory Workgroup Products(continued)

• Information about any ancillary data that are systematically collected as part of the monitoring networks

• Any background information (or references to such information) that explains the logic for the choices about where to monitor, what to monitor, and frequency of data collection

Products expected from Methods and Data Comparability Workgroup• General criteria to determine whether data

collected by different monitoring programs can be shared across boundaries

• General criteria will be tested with actual data sets from the case study areas

• Identify the most significant barriers to comparison of data derived from different monitoring programs.

Final Report

• About 50 pages• Intended audience is top-level decision

makers• Content of individual chapters to be

prepared by workgroups• Will need writer/editor to actually prepare

text, working closely with NMN SC• Technical appendices to be published as

separate volume

Tasks for Annapolis meeting

• Refine spatial scale for NMN• Consider how existing specialty monitoring

efforts will be integrated into NMN, atmospheric deposition, for example

• Linkages between upland monitoring and IOOS

• Data management workgroup and charge• Report to SWAQ• Timeline